News Corporation on Wednesday released The Daily, its new digital newspaper with a full staff of reporters covering worldwide news that, for now, is exclusive to the iPad, and free to try for two weeks. AppleInsider offers a first look at the publication that hopes to become the future of newspapers.

Before downloading The Daily, users must agree to the updated iTunes terms and conditions, which note that the application may request permission to provide personal information to third parties for marketing purposes. Users can, however, choose to opt out of this.

The ability to share personal information of subscribers with advertisers was said to be a major sticking point between Apple and publishers, as the two sides attempted to broker a deal for in-application subscriptions. For now, the details of Apple's in-app subscriptions remain unknown, as The Daily is the only to offer the service.

Apple's head of iTunes, Eddy Cue, said on Wednesday that Apple would reveal more information about in-app subscriptions, and make the feature available to other content providers and application makers, in the near future.

When launching The Daily, downloading a new issue requires users to launch the application. It is not automatically delivered through background downloading, as was previously rumored.

Upon launching the application, users are met with an initial loading screen: "A new issue of The Daily. is being delivered." On first launch, the application asks for the ability to access the user's current location and the ability to send push notifications. Nothing is asked about sharing personal information with advertisers.

The loading process is quick, and users are presented with the carousel, where they can view and browse through sections and stories, though scrolling through the coverflow-like interface displays considerable lag. The content is displayed before the entire issue is downloaded, and progress in downloading latest issue shows up in the top left corner.

But The Daily is not limited to once-a-day updates. Though the publication will primarily offer a new issue every morning, much like a newspaper, editors will also be able to update content throughout the day with breaking news or updates to stories.

The publication, financed by billionaire Rupert Murdoch, features a large team of global reporters. For the initial issue, reporters are on location in Cairo, Egypt, covering the nation's political turmoil. In addition to original reporting, it includes stories from sources like the Associated Press, like most newspapers.

Text-based content, like editorials on the opinion page, can be read in either portrait or landscape mode. When reading a news story with photos, users can see enlarged versions of the pictures by tilting the iPad into landscape mode, while portrait is intended for reading.

Content is divided into six distinct sections: News, Gossip, Opinion, Arts & Life, Apps & Games and Sports. For some pages with more graphical content, switching between portrait and landscape mode is slightly laggy. Elsewhere, the application is generally very responsive.

A scroll bar at the top, dubbed the "visual browser," gives readers a sense of how far through The Daily they are as they read. And interactivity plays a key role, as many stories include features video, while a story in the sports section features Super Bowl trivia. Advertisements from companies like Land Rover are also interactive, with video and motion.

Stories can also be read aloud by clicking the headphones button, available in the tray of the carousel view. A "fast forward" button also flips through stories, while a 'shuffle" button finds a random unread one. There's even a video introduction to the day's issue, summarizing some of the top stories.

Users can also select their favorite sports teams, where they are able to read headlines, check scores and stats, and even quickly see Twitter posts associated with the team and players.

The application also includes integration with Apple's GameCenter social networking service, tracking sudoku scores and allowing users to compete with friends and time themselves when working on a puzzle. Sudoku and crossword puzzles are included in the "Apps & Games" section of The Daily, as is content focused on applications available for download in the App Store.

As with a website or blog, readers can comment on a story, though audio comments are also permitted. Leaving a comment requires a user to register with a username, password and e-mail address.

Stories can also be shared via Facebook, Twitter or e-mail. Loading a story in a browser on a computer gives the full text, but also alerts the reader that the "article has been shared from The Daily iPad app." It also includes an "FYI" that reads: "The shared version of this article is missing content only available in The Daily iPad app."

The Daily is available for free for two weeks, through sponsor Verizon Wireless. This is reflected in the settings of the application, where "Account Information" reads that the current subscription is valid through Feb. 16, 2011. There users can opt to enroll in a weekly subscription of 99 cents, or a yearly subscription for $39.99, a savings of more than 20 percent off the weekly price.

Selecting a subscription prompts users with an iPad notification, asking to confirm the intent to subscribe. The payments of 99 cents per week or $39.99 per year are automatically recurring, until a user decides to cancel.

Color me confused, but I really want this. I never picked up an iPad 1 because of weight, screen refresh rates, no FaceTime, and the fact that I have an iPhone 4, a new MBP at home, and an iMac at work...

All along I've been glad for Apple with their iPad success, but haven't been tempted to buy an iPad. Until now.

I know. Call me crazy. But this is a killer app for me. Or at least it has the potential to be, as I've only read reviews like this one and not experienced it for myself.

Quick Story: My mom with iPad in tow visited my sister in London recently. My sister has two young children (2 & 4) and they loved the iPad. Just loved it! Now that my mom is gone, my sister says her children keep rubbing their hands all over the television trying to get it to respond. They do it on her MacBook, too.

It just goes to show how intuitive it is to expect to interact with your media.

My fingers are crossed for a great product in The Daily and a nice update in iPad v.2.

Great photography, like the old Life and Look magazines. Nice kerning too. But in general it looks like a really nicely designed web site. The Daily is competing against free. Good luck with that.

eventually "free" won't be free anymore. Case in point: the NY Times is preparing to activate their pay wall on nytimes.com. The wall street journal is already behind a pay wall. If you want watered down AP feeds and non-professional bloggers, then fine, that will always be free. But true journalists need to get paid.

Color me confused, but I really want this. I never picked up an iPad 1 because of weight, screen refresh rates, no FaceTime, and the fact that I have an iPhone 4, a new MBP at home, and an iMac at work...

All along I've been glad for Apple with their iPad success, but haven't been tempted to buy an iPad. Until now.

I know. Call me crazy. But this is a killer app for me. Or at least it has the potential to be, as I've only read reviews like this one and not experienced it for myself.

Quick Story: My mom with iPad in tow visited my sister in London recently. My sister has two young children (2 & 4) and they loved the iPad. Just loved it! Now that my mom is gone, my sister says her children keep rubbing their hands all over the television trying to get it to respond. They do it on her MacBook, too.

It just goes to show how intuitive it is to expect to interact with your media.

My fingers are crossed for a great product in The Daily and a nice update in iPad v.2.

Today's the first day I have really wished I owned one.

Good story, Shogun...I have an iPhone 4, too, along with an iMac with the new TrackPad and MagicMouse. Love all the touch gestures. Just this morning I was helping a friend load some software on a 2 year old Dell. I looked like a chimpanzee because I kept doing the Apple "touch" gestures on the Dell's trackpad....Uggh! I absolutely hate working on Windows machines! Best and looking fwd to the new iPad2. Will pick one up as soon as them come out.

The interface may be neat, although I see Gruber describes it as not groundbreaking and "laggy" in at least one area. I was already wary of the content, considering it comes from the parent company of Fox News. Then the intro, as the screenshot in the article shows, talks about American exceptionalism and that was it--no thanks.

If you want watered down AP feeds and non-professional bloggers, then fine, that will always be free. But true journalists need to get paid.

True dat. AP was my favorite app on my iPhone for about a month and a half. Then I started noticing how typically weak the reporting was. When I really thought about it it was the lowest quality of all my news sources.

So I dropped it for all the reasons above and because they seemed to have a rule over there that they must push out a breaking news alarm at least once a day. That also got old real fast.

(I know I could turn off the push alarms, but I liked them for real news like hearing of a major earthquake. I just wasn't so keen on being interrupted at dinner or in a meeting for Tiger Woods updates and the like. So whether I kept it on or turned it off I felt I would be losing something, and that made me just want to remove myself from the AP News world altogether.)

Color me confused, but I really want this. I never picked up an iPad 1 because of weight, screen refresh rates, no FaceTime, and the fact that I have an iPhone 4, a new MBP at home, and an iMac at work...

All along I've been glad for Apple with their iPad success, but haven't been tempted to buy an iPad. Until now.

I know. Call me crazy. But this is a killer app for me. Or at least it has the potential to be, as I've only read reviews like this one and not experienced it for myself.

Quick Story: My mom with iPad in tow visited my sister in London recently. My sister has two young children (2 & 4) and they loved the iPad. Just loved it! Now that my mom is gone, my sister says her children keep rubbing their hands all over the television trying to get it to respond. They do it on her MacBook, too.

It just goes to show how intuitive it is to expect to interact with your media.

My fingers are crossed for a great product in The Daily and a nice update in iPad v.2.

Today's the first day I have really wished I owned one.

I agree completely. Thanks for the story. My Grandkids are the same way.

eventually "free" won't be free anymore. Case in point: the NY Times is preparing to activate their pay wall on nytimes.com. The wall street journal is already behind a pay wall. If you want watered down AP feeds and non-professional bloggers, then fine, that will always be free. But true journalists need to get paid.

Good points...I get the print edition of the WSJ...read the washington post online, NYT online and get Time's print edition. Plus Foreign Affairs, MacWorld, and many more.

Don't have an iPad yet but hope to switch all my reading material over to an iPad when the new one comes out. Including books, using iBooks and the NYT "Best Seller" list. Hope to read most of the books on that list each year. Just to be "well read!"

I am a fan of the free USATODAY app because it is simple. I like The Daily's interactive features, however, it's a little too busy and cumbersome to navigate. But, for only 99 cents a week, I would certainly give it a try.

eventually "free" won't be free anymore. Case in point: the NY Times is preparing to activate their pay wall on nytimes.com. The wall street journal is already behind a pay wall. If you want watered down AP feeds and non-professional bloggers, then fine, that will always be free. But true journalists need to get paid.

It never was free. What's really meant here I guess is that fully ad-supported would be better. I say, good luck with that -- it's never worked before, except in publications where most of the "content" is ads.

I get a kick out of how upset some people get over FOX news, their reporting, and management. Is FOX biased? Yes. Is ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, BBC, Al Jazeera, etc. biased? Yes! They all are. They are run and owned by people that have their own unique world view and because they are human, that world view (bias) comes into play in how they operate their business, what they report, and how they report it.

The simple act of liking or disliking something (red heads, BMWs, FOX) is a personal bias and it is OK. There are studies that have shown that people are "hard wired" to find certain facial features and body types to be attractive. There are studies that show that we are drawn towards people that share similar interest and philosophies as we do. It is only natural that people have a bias for the kind of news, the style of news that they want to consume. It is the task of the organization to give the people what they want - it is a business after all.

Love one or hate one - the best way to be informed is to read/listen/watch to several diverse sources and then think for yourself.

I have no problem with paying for "true journalism" but I doubt there is any of that going on in the Daily. It is Fox after all.

It's also trivially true that any web-based or iPad based news is going to be even more to the "info-tainment" end of the spectrum than the "journalism" end of the spectrum. A "multi-media" newspaper is kind of lightweight news by definition, not hard-core journalism.

The interface may be neat, although I see Gruber describes it as not groundbreaking and "laggy" in at least one area. I was already wary of the content, considering it comes from the parent company of Fox News. Then the intro, as the screenshot in the article shows, talks about American exceptionalism and that was it--no thanks.

I guess I can relate. I'd probably ignore anything produced by CNN. Or ABC. Or NBC. Or MSNBC. Or CBS. Or PBS. Or a mess of other propogandists.

I get a kick out of how upset some people get over FOX news, their reporting, and management. Is FOX biased? Yes. Is ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, BBC, Al Jazeera, etc. biased? Yes! They all are. They are run and owned by people that have their own unique world view and because they are human, that world view (bias) comes into play in how they operate their business, what they report, and how they report it.

The simple act of liking or disliking something (red heads, BMWs, FOX) is a personal bias and it is OK. There are studies that have shown that people are "hard wired" to find certain facial features and body types to be attractive. There are studies that show that we are drawn towards people that share similar interest and philosophies as we do. It is only natural that people have a bias for the kind of news, the style of news that they want to consume. It is the task of the organization to give the people what they want - it is a business after all.

Love one or hate one - the best way to be informed is to read/listen/watch to several diverse sources and then think for yourself.

I think the beef with Fox is that they created their news operation with the goal of being biased as the top priority and the main concept for making money. Roger Ailes? Come on the guy was the worst kind of black politico ops man there was. And then you give him a news operation? Of course he is going to purposely, willfully and exuberantly bias every single bit of information they release. The other news operations don't have that predetermined mandate to skew everything a certain way. I have worked in TV news stations and most of the people there aren't smart enough to figure out how to twist a story to a particular leaning. The networks still have enough ghosts of journalist past that they try to just present the facts. Of course they are forced to do this within the framework of the marketing department who is trying to "sell news". Fox and Ailes (and Limbaugh for that matter) figured out a long time ago that there was a sizable market for "news" that leaned a certain way. For information that told viewers what they already (often erroneously) believed. Fox and Murdoch and Ailes don't really believe in the ideology they push and exploit on their air. They believe in making money. End of story.

Oh wait there's more story. It is completely plausible that Murdoch and company won't skew the reporting in the "The Daily" the same way Fox skews things. In fact I doubt they will. This could be the beginning of a new exploitation for them. They see a another market ripe for the picking. It just isn't the Fox market. And besides why would they make "The Daily" like Fox? If they wan to do that they'll make a iPad magazine called "Fox Daily".

It's very easy to imagine Murdoch finding a way to play on both sides of the fence here. And make huge dollars at both.

Oh wait there's more story. It is completely plausible that Murdoch and company won't skew the reporting in the "The Daily" the same way Fox skews things. In fact I doubt they will. This could be the beginning of a new exploitation for them. They see a another market ripe for the picking. It just isn't the Fox market. And beside why would the make "The Daily" like Fox? IF they wan to do that they'll make a iPad magazine called "Fox Daily".

It's very easy to imagine Murdoch finding a way to play on both sides of the fence here. And make huge dollars at both.

I am sure you are correct.

From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've owned them all.Long on AAPL so biased"Google doesn't sell you anything, Google just sells you!"

What you say regarding broadcasting networks is true to a certain extent. However, foreign news sources like CBC or BBC as organizations tend to present more then one side to a story. CBC is especially good. When america went into Iraq, BBC didn't give people the government line. It made an effort to present the facts.

Where Fox goes wrong is it tries to present editorial shows as News. Other organizations do not do this nearly as much as Fox. Further, its tag line is fair and balanced, which clearly is not the case. A news organization should make every effort to just present the facts, not just the facts that represent it's view point. News programs should leave the opinion making to the viewers.

Fox actively distorts the news. For instance, with Global warming. The powers that be actively told its networks to report only the side that disagrees global warming is an issue. How are viewers who think Fox is providing them the news to form educated opinions based on only half the story? The answer is they can't. Fox doesn't want people to formulate such opinions on their own.

CNN at least tries. None of these organizations like to go after the government in any meaningful fashion.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stan_Timek

I get a kick out of how upset some people get over FOX news, their reporting, and management. Is FOX biased? Yes. Is ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, BBC, Al Jazeera, etc. biased? Yes! They all are. They are run and owned by people that have their own unique world view and because they are human, that world view (bias) comes into play in how they operate their business, what they report, and how they report it.

The simple act of liking or disliking something (red heads, BMWs, FOX) is a personal bias and it is OK. There are studies that have shown that people are "hard wired" to find certain facial features and body types to be attractive. There are studies that show that we are drawn towards people that share similar interest and philosophies as we do. It is only natural that people have a bias for the kind of news, the style of news that they want to consume. It is the task of the organization to give the people what they want - it is a business after all.

Love one or hate one - the best way to be informed is to read/listen/watch to several diverse sources and then think for yourself.

The interface may be neat, although I see Gruber describes it as not groundbreaking and "laggy" in at least one area. I was already wary of the content, considering it comes from the parent company of Fox News. Then the intro, as the screenshot in the article shows, talks about American exceptionalism and that was it--no thanks.

Yeah, "exceptionalism" is the new Republican buzzword, as conservatives accuse President Obama of not loving America enough and not believing in "American exceptionalism." (They ususally cite a single out of context quote to support their accusation.) I imagine they want to be on their best behavior for a while, but they just couldn't resist a Republican dog whistle.